Argument38

晚来风急UID??2314775

The arguer recommends use Ichthaid, a supplement derived from fish oil to prevent cols, the most frequently used reason for absences, based on the study of nearby East Meria (EM ) where has high fish consumption and low rate of colds. The argument is convincing at the first glance, but suffers three flaws after scrutiny.

To begin with, the study is not reliable to conclude that eating a substantial amount of fish can prevent colds. On the one hand, the fact of few visiting the doctor says little more than that the number who go to hospital, and that is all. We are not informed the exact number of cold patients who have a rest at home without asking advice from the doctor. On the other side, the arguer fails to establish a causal relationship between the colds preventing and eating fish. Contingencies such as the good habit of exercising and flesh air with less pollution can all lead to the declined number of colds patients. In that sense, the arguer cannot simply draw conclusion on the study.

Then, the arguer unfairly assume the prevent of the colds can reduce absenteeism as a result. No detailed information is provided of the real situation of the absence. Perhaps, colds is most frequently used excuses for absence who just have other trouble but afraid of the rules. Or perhaps the high absenteeism caused by colds is just a phenomena in a short term caused by the recently sudden cooling of the weather. Without ruling out all these scenarios, the arguer cannot use it as a solid evidence to support the conclusion.

Last, the arguer's suggestion of use Ichthaid daily is not well-grounded. The function of Ichthaid is still open to doubt for the reason that the nutritional supplement from fish oil not means it has the same treatment of colds as the fish is. It is highly possible that Ichthaid is just a supplement to supply the basic nutrition to the patients. Any further linkage of Ichthaid with colds treatment requires more evidence.

To sum up, the argument is unpersuasive as it stands. To strengthen the argument, the arguer should supply more detailed information about the study in EM and the function of nutritional Ichthaid. The evidence, if any, of the situation of absence from school and work is also required. In that the way, the arguer can better demonstrate his conclusion and provide more promising recommendation.

outline

1.study not reliable

(1)not well establish the relationship of fish consumption and the colds. Maybe other possibility like the good habit of exercising in the city or the slight degree of environment pollution

(2)cannot connect visiting doctor to the real rate of getting cold

2.no information of the detail of absences

(1)the reason of cold is sometimes excuse for the real reason

(2)not mention time maybe just not short-term attribute to the sudden cooling of the weather.

(3)regardless of other reasons equally important

3. whether Ichthaid work is still open to doubt

(1)derived from fish oil may not cure colds